|
Cpt_Obvious posted:I completely disagree. The vast changes to feats and class abilities have balanced the game out quite a bit. Most spell casters cap out at around 4 spells per level, meaning you have to be shrewd with your spells, but they did give them special abilities that are great. The game is pretty balanced when given the proper setting. It is NOT made to be a battle royal, all of the classes have a purpose and they all fulfill their purpose very well. I find that when people say this they tend to lack an imagination. That's cool but you're objectively wrong so...
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2010 06:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 05:49 |
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:So? it makes sense that the tempo should be set by the classes that need time management. You don't make it so that casters can only attack with a sling, just that they have to save their more powerful spells for the bigger opponents. They can't just blow their load every single fight and expect to be fine with it. While it's true your casters shouldn't nova every fight this is still invalid for reasons beyond the ones CoolCab pointed out. The non-caster classes are often fundamentally limited by the resources of the casting ones in terms of necessary buffs/healing so that any "longevity" is in fact an illusion. Moreover, spells are SO powerful relative to martial abilities and non-casters so weak compared to most monsters that at higher levels running out of spells becomes tantamount to failure if there are non-trivial encounters ahead that you cannot rest before- proceeding would be suicide. Therefore while time limits between many encounters can challenge a spellcaster and party as a whole it does not do it in a way that reaffirms the role of martial classes or highlights their usefulness- quite the opposite in fact. edit: That does sound like a nice app, though yeah a laptop one would be a natural extension. I like the 4E character builder and the compendium is nice but WotCs electronic offerings are really pretty underwhelming compared to what they could be doing and it certainly wouldn't be a bad thing to have someone else show them up a bit. LGD fucked around with this message at 00:23 on Feb 26, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2010 00:21
|
|
|
Danhenge posted:Vow of Poverty sucked for monks anyway Vow of Poverty sucked for pretty much everybody with possible exception of Druids if you knew with nearly complete certainty that your game was going to end before you got above the mid levels.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:The on/off turn distinction is a little fuzzy, since you can, for example, load a bow (a free action) during an opportunity attack made as a result of Snap Shot, which is likely to occur on someone else's turn. Probably best to limit off-turn free actions to narrow cases like that and speech. On the flip side 3.x had a boatload of extremely situational and borderline useless feats like that, a number of which actively ruled out doing things that should have been/were possible for anyone before the feat's publication. If I was GM I'd be pretty inclined to let the Barbarian rage.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2012 10:18
|
|
|
ChrisAsmadi posted:I think there was a core part of Resonance that wasn't too bad, actually. The issue was the fact that they used it for consumable stuff as well and had it influenced by an ability score. If it had just been "you can equip x amount of magic items at any one time" then I think it could have been more interesting than the existing body slots system (which suffers because certain slots - Belts or Cloaks, for instance - have mandatory choices that mean you can't really use the interesting choices in those slots). honestly it would have been a pretty decent way to make items scale so you could avoid the uninteresting parts of the loot treadmill as well, as you'd let players invest more resonance to get more effect out of the math boosting items up to caps determined by their level/item, with differences in the size of resonance pools a possible class differentiator (i.e. for the first time in D&D's history the old lie about magic items being a leveling factor for martial classes might actually be true since they'd actually get/be able to use more of them) you'd also be able to let specific magic items can have more narrative importance by growing with character puissance instead of simply being swapped out within a level or two, while unimportant ones could remain more limited in scope - i.e. the ancestral sword of your paladin's noble ancestors could scale nicely into the mid-high levels without ever being too strong, while the magic shortsword your party's rogue knicked off a goblin shaman caps out at a +2 and needs to be replaced you also could more easily fake "low/lower magic" setting variants (not that this is a thing D&D/Pathfinder has ever been good at) by not bothering to cap weapons or letting characters spend resonance to buy set enhancements to make the math work while still ostensibly running around with the same "mundane" spear they had at level 1 otoh this is a totally different approach that I absolutely wouldn't trust Paizo to balance well and many people like the loot treadmill, and none of this was really anything they were trying to do (which was just fixing the aesthetically undesirable emergent behavior of CLW wand spamming) LGD fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Mar 14, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 07:01
|
|